Lexico-stylistic features of the expression of indignation in a fiction and its film version: comparative analysis

Jazokova Yuliya Assistant, Department of Foreign Languages, Saint Petersburg State University of Veterinary Medicine 196084, Russia, Saint Petersburg, st. Chernigovskaya, 5 avokyzja@hotmail.com Other publications by this author

Conflict as an integral component of human interaction is studied by many researchers in various fields of scientific knowledge: psychology, sociology, political science, philosophy, linguistics, etc. Thus, in linguistics, within the framework of conflict communication, researchers consider the verbal realization of the intention of indignation ^{[11],[17],[19],[21]}. Works of fiction and cinematographic art often become the material of researchers considering perturbations, however, researchers do not differentiate and do not compare the verbal realization of the intention of perturbation in the text of fiction and in cinematography (film adaptations). It should also be noted that the interest of researchers in the topic of film adaptation of works of fiction is quite high ^{[2],[4],[15],[18]}. All this determines the relevance of addressing the chosen topic.

The present work aims to identify the most common patterns of changing statements with the intention of outrage in the screening of fiction. The visual and other sound components of the film adaptation, including non-verbal communication, musical inserts and other sound effects, were not considered. The research focuses on the lexical transformations of character dialogues with the intention of outrage in works of fiction and their film adaptations. Lexical transformations are understood as transformations of elements of the source text (text of fiction) when transferring them to a secondary text (film adaptation).

The material was used in the films, released between 2009 and 2019 and is the film adaptations of works of modern fiction. Works of fiction created by the authors from 1991 to 2019 were selected for analysis.

Criteria for the selection of films (produced on the website kinopoisk.ru ): 1) the rating of the film is more than 6.5; 2) the votes given to the film are more than 20,000; 3) the presence of at least one award; 4) the duration of the action in the film is from the 1970s to our time. Eccentric comedy films based on exaggerating the actions and character traits of the characters were not used, since this creates a comic effect that is unusual for the communicative interaction of people in real life. Thus, the following factors were taken into account: the artistic value of the film, the recognition of the film by a large number of viewers and the proximity of the characters' communicative behavior to real communication. The text of the literary work was compared with the verbal component of the film that was released. Note that the original script of the film and its subsequent incarnation on the screen may differ from each other for various reasons, so it seems appropriate to consider the film as a finished work.

Indignation is understood as "extreme discontent, indignation, anger" ^{[1, p. 144]}. Indignation is a strong emotional reaction of the addressee to the actions (verbal and non-verbal) of the addressee. In this article, outrage is considered as a tactic that implements a confrontational strategy. The tactics of perturbation are implemented in various tactical steps, which are taken as a unit of analysis in the study. Lexical transformations are considered in coincident tactical steps in the text of a work of fiction and in the film adaptation. A tactical step (a communicative move, a speech move, a communicative step) is "a technique that acts as a tool for implementing a particular speech tactic" ^{[5, p. 117]}. Speech tactics is a larger element in terms of the scale of consideration in comparison with the tactical step, it obeys the general strategy of speech behavior, which is understood as "a set of speech actions aimed at achieving a communicative goal" ^{[5, p. 54]}.

The research focuses on the lexical transformations of dialogues of characters in works of fiction and their film adaptations. Lexical transformations were divided into the following groups:

1. Preservation of the lexical composition. In this group, the film adaptation completely borrows the words of the characters of the literary work without any lexical changes. An example from a work of fiction ^{[14, p. 30]}:

– <...> You are studying razors for the second year. May they stick all these razors in your throat!

An example from the film adaptation ^[7]:

A: You've been studying razors for the second year // So that they put all these razors in your throat!

Another example from a work of fiction ^{[16, p. 106]}

– And what?! What do you know about her?

An example from the film adaptation ^[8]:

A: And what // What / Do you know about her?

In the examples given, the words of characters from works of fiction are pronounced by movie characters with full preservation of lexical composition. However, in most cases, the tactical step of the disturbance undergoes some changes.

2. Omission of lexical units. In this group, the film adaptation lacks some lexical units used in the text of a work of fiction. An example from a work of fiction ^{[16, p. 106]}:

– You and I were born on these bones, we walk, ride, fuck on bones. Your coffee is made from bones, and you... you... do you want me to stand up after that?

An example from the film adaptation ^[8]:

A: Do you even understand // That we / were born on these bones // Fuck on these bones // Even the coffee is yours / From these bones // And you haven't even learned how to count them // Do you want me to have a hard time after that?

In the example above, the specified lexical units are missing in the film adaptation. The omissions of "with you" and "walking, driving" are explained by the desire of oral colloquial speech for conciseness. Dialogues from a literary work and a film adaptation are stylized oral colloquial speech, however, the film adaptation has more features peculiar to oral colloquial speech. The omission of "you ... you ..." in this case can be explained by a different idea of the filmmakers: in a work of fiction, the addressee chooses the words, he is shocked, while in the film adaptation the addressee speaks confidently.

3. Adding lexical units. In this type of transformation, lexical units that are missing from the literary source are added to the film adaptation. An example from a work of fiction ^{[3, p. 86]}:

– Who am I going to find in this hole?!

An example from the film adaptation ^[6]:

A: Who am I going to find in this hole?

In the given example, let's pay attention to the addition of the particle "-that", which is used to explain the reason for the impossibility of any action, fact ^{[10, p. 470]}, the particle "yes" is used to give the statement greater strength and emotionality ^{[10, p. 476]}.

Another example from a work of fiction ^{[16, p. 106]}:

– Do you understand where you live?! "Stop it!" he shouted.

An example from the film adaptation ^[8]:

A: Do you even understand / Where do you live?

In the above example, the particle "though" is added to the film adaptation, which is used to strengthen the word to which it refers ^{[1, p. 1452]}, therefore, the emphasis is on the word "you understand", which emphasizes the outrage of the addressee of the addressee's misunderstanding. The conjunction "a" is used to enhance expressiveness ^{[1, p. 23]}, i.e. the addition of the conjunction "a" makes the statement more emotional.

Another example from a work of fiction ^{[3, p. 86]}:

– Why are you rummaging through my underwear?! "Stop it!" she yelled.

An example from the film adaptation ^[6]:

A: Why are you rummaging in my underwear / Freak!

In the example above, the invective lexeme "freak" is added to the film adaptation, which gives the replica more verbal aggression. Verbal aggression is "offensive communication; verbal expression of negative emotions, feelings or intentions in an offensive, rude, unacceptable form in a given speech situation" ^{[22, p. 9]}. The researchers also point out that invective vocabulary is a characteristic feature of indignation ^{[21, p. 99]}. In other examples, the invective lexemes "bitch", "jerk", "scoundrel", etc. are added.

Another example from a work of fiction ^{[14, p. 32]}:

–A ruddy dawn..." she was saying. – So that you don't see any dawn anymore!

An example from the film adaptation ^[7]:

A: Rosy dawn // May you never again / No dawn / I didn't see // The bastard!

Let's pay attention in the example to the addition of the words "never again". This addition makes the statement more categorical.

4. Replacement of lexical units. Many lexical units in the film adaptation are replaced by synonymous ones. Here is an example from a work of fiction ^{[14, p. 11]}:

– My hands again! This smelly old man wiped himself with this towel yesterday, and he has a fungus on his leg!

An example from the film adaptation ^[7]:

A: This smelly old man wiped himself with this towel yesterday / He has a fungus on his leg // Wash up!

In the example above, the words "wash your hands again" are replaced by "wash your hands." This substitution can be explained by the desire of oral colloquial speech to save speech resources. Also, in a literary work, the conjunction "a" is replaced by the particle "same" in the film adaptation, such a replacement is considered synonymous ^{[12, p. 5]}.

Let's turn to another example from a work of fiction ^{[3, p. 62]}:

– Am I your housewife or something? Nadia was indignant.

An example from the film adaptation ^[6]:

A: Am I that / Housewife / Budkin?

In this example, the pronoun "you" is replaced by the reduced "those". Often such substitutions occur due to truncation. Other substitutions: "what/ what" to "what", "nothing" to "nothing" and some others.

Another example from a work of fiction ^{[3, p. 14]}:

– Ha! – The servant was indignant.

An example from the film adaptation ^[6]:

A: Hello!

Let's pay attention to the interjection "ha", expressing "disagreement, doubt, indignation" ^{[1, p. 1438]}, and the interjection "hello": the prosodic intonation form "hello" indicates dissatisfaction with some unexpected event (Hello, that's all that was missing) ^{[20, p. 150]}. We consider the interjection "hello" to be a more expressive form of expression of indignation.

Let's turn to another example from a work of fiction ^{[13, p. 239]}:

– Who took the Swan last time?

An example from the film adaptation ^[9]:

A: Who was the last person to take Ivanov?

In the given example, proper names are replaced due to changes in the content of the film adaptation. In other cases, the replacement due to the content has additional characteristics. Here is an example from a work of fiction ^{[3, p. 210]}:

– <...> you don't need anything at all except grub, TV and toilet…

An example from the film adaptation ^[6]:

A: <...> you don't need anything at all // Except mobile phones / Porn / And drugs.

In the above example, "grub, TV and toilet" are replaced with "mobile phones, porn and drugs", because the creators of the film adaptation changed the content of the work: the novel takes place in the 90s, and the action of the film adaptation is in modern Russia (at the time of the film's release – 2013). For this reason, TV, watching which was a familiar pastime in the 90s, and has now lost its relevance, has been replaced by mobile phones (in the film adaptation, the colloquial "mobile phones"), and the words "porn" and "drugs" are more provocative lexical units.

Thus, we identify four groups of lexical transformations of statements with the intention of outrage in the screening of works of fiction: verbatim preservation of lexical composition, omission of lexical units, addition of lexical units and replacement of lexical units. These transformations occur due to the following reasons: secondly, for an emotional impact on the audience - for this reason, the characters of the film adaptation are more emotional in expressing their feelings and experiences, their statements are more categorical, and there is more verbal aggression in the film adaptation. Secondly, transformations occur due to changes in the details of the content of situations. Finally, the film adaptation has more features peculiar to oral colloquial speech: there is more colloquial vocabulary in the film adaptation, and the characters speak more briefly, since this is due to the general tendency of oral colloquial speech to save speech resources.